Skip to content
2000
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Current Medical Imaging
  4. Volume 20, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 20, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1573-4056
  • E-ISSN: 1875-6603
file format pdf download PDF
side by side viewer icon HTML

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to verify whether the Liver-to-portal Ratio (LPR) can assess the adequacy of the Hepatobiliary Phase (HBP) for patients with different liver functions.

Methods

A total of 125 patients were prospectively enrolled in the study and graded into the non-cirrhosis group (45), Child-Pugh A group (40), and Child-Pugh B/C group (40). The LPR on HBP was calculated after eight HBPs were obtained within 5-40 minutes. The adequate HBP was determined according to the 2016 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus statement. The differences in LPR and lesions’ conspicuity between 10-min HBP and adequate HBP were analyzed by paired -test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test, respectively. The chi-square test was used to test the difference in proportion with LPR larger than 1.462 between 10-min HBP and adequate HBP.

Results

The differences in LPR and lesions’ conspicuity between 10-min HBP and adequate HBP were significant in Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B/C groups ( < 0.05), except for the non-cirrhosis group ( > 0.05). The differences in proportion with LPR larger than 1.462 between 10-min HBP and adequate HBP were not statistically significant in all groups (all > 0.05).

Conclusion

The adequate HBP obtained according to the 2016 ESGAR consensus statement could provide larger LPR and better lesions’ conspicuity than 10-min HBP, especially for cirrhotic patients; however, the efficacy of using an LPR cutoff of 1.462 as the standard of the adequate HBP may be compromised in patients with cirrhosis.

© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Bentham Science Publisher.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0), a copy of which is available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056318603240910115315
2024-01-01
2025-04-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056318603240910115315
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
The full text of this item is not currently available.

References

  1. HammB. StaksT. MühlerA. BollowM. TaupitzM. FrenzelT. WolfK.J. WeinmannH.J. LangeL. Phase I clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA as a hepatobiliary MR contrast agent: Safety, pharmacokinetics, and MR imaging.Radiology1995195378579210.1148/radiology.195.3.77540117754011
     [Google Scholar]
  2. VoglT.J. KümmelS. HammerstinglR. SchellenbeckM. SchumacherG. BalzerT. SchwarzW. MüllerP.K. BechsteinW.O. MackM.G. SöllnerO. FelixR. Liver tumors: Comparison of MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA.Radiology19962001596710.1148/radiology.200.1.86579468657946
     [Google Scholar]
  3. AkimotoS. MoriH. FujiiT. FuruyaK. Optimal scan timing for Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced liver dynamic MR imaging.Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi200965562663010.6009/jjrt.65.626
     [Google Scholar]
  4. DermotM. Magnetic resonance imaging of the liver: Consensus statement from the 1st international primovist user meeting.Eur Radiol Suppl.200818Suppl 484986410.1007/s10406‑008‑0010‑1.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. KitaoA. MatsuiO. YonedaN. KozakaK. ShinmuraR. KodaW. KobayashiS. GabataT. ZenY. YamashitaT. KanekoS. NakanumaY. The uptake transporter OATP8 expression decreases during multistep hepatocarcinogenesis: Correlation with gadoxetic acid enhanced MR imaging.Eur. Radiol.201121102056206610.1007/s00330‑011‑2165‑821626360
     [Google Scholar]
  6. ZhouX. LongL. MoZ. LiY. OATP1B3 expression in hepatocellular carcinoma correlates with intralesional Gd-EOB-DTPA uptake and signal intensity on Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI.Cancer Manag. Res.2021131169117710.2147/CMAR.S29219733603462
     [Google Scholar]
  7. SofueK. TsurusakiM. TokueH. AraiY. SugimuraK. Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced 3.0 T MR imaging: Quantitative and qualitative comparison of hepatocyte-phase images obtained 10 min and 20 min after injection for the detection of liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma.Eur. Radiol.201121112336234310.1007/s00330‑011‑2197‑021748389
     [Google Scholar]
  8. NakamuraS. AwaiK. UtsunomiyaD. NamimotoT. NakauraT. MoritaK. YamashitaY. Chronological evaluation of liver enhancement in patients with chronic liver disease at Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced 3-T MR imaging: Does liver function correlate with enhancement?Jpn. J. Radiol.2012301253310.1007/s11604‑011‑0003‑122160649
     [Google Scholar]
  9. van KesselC.S. VeldhuisW.B. van den BoschM.A.A.J. van LeeuwenM.S. MR liver imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA: A delay time of 10 minutes is sufficient for lesion characterisation.Eur. Radiol.201222102153216010.1007/s00330‑012‑2486‑222645040
     [Google Scholar]
  10. EstersonY.B. FlusbergM. OhS. MazzariolF. RozenblitA.M. ChernyakV. Improved parenchymal liver enhancement with extended delay on Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI in patients with parenchymal liver disease: Associated clinical and imaging factors.Clin. Radiol.201570772372910.1016/j.crad.2015.03.00525921617
     [Google Scholar]
  11. LiangM. ZhaoJ. XieB. LiC. YinX. ChengL. WangJ. ZhangL. MR liver imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA: The need for different delay times of the hepatobiliary phase in patients with different liver function.Eur. J. Radiol.201685354655210.1016/j.ejrad.2015.12.01526860666
     [Google Scholar]
  12. WuJ.W. YuY.C. QuX.L. ZhangY. GaoH. Optimization of hepatobiliary phase delay time of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for identification of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis of different degrees of severity.World J. Gastroenterol.201824341542310.3748/wjg.v24.i3.41529391764
     [Google Scholar]
  13. MotosugiU. IchikawaT. TominagaL. SouH. SanoK. IchikawaS. ArakiT. Delay before the hepatocyte phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging: Is it possible to shorten the examination time?Eur. Radiol.200919112623262910.1007/s00330‑009‑1467‑619471935
     [Google Scholar]
  14. BashirM.R. BreaultS.R. BraunR. DoR.K. NelsonR.C. ReederS.B. Optimal timing and diagnostic adequacy of hepatocyte phase imaging with gadoxetate-enhanced liver MRI.Acad. Radiol.201421672673210.1016/j.acra.2014.02.00524717550
     [Google Scholar]
  15. TakatsuY. KobayashiS. MiyatiT. ShiozakiT. A novel method for evaluating enhancement using gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine penta-acetic acid in the hepatobiliary phase of magnetic resonance imaging.Clin. Imaging20164061112111710.1016/j.clinimag.2016.07.00127450444
     [Google Scholar]
  16. MoriY. MotosugiU. ShimizuT. IchikawaS. KromreyM.L. OnishiH. Predicting patients with insufficient liver enhancement in the hepatobiliary phase before the injection of gadoxetic acid: A practical approach using the Bayesian method.J. Magn. Reson. Imaging2020511626910.1002/jmri.2676031016840
     [Google Scholar]
  17. TakatsuY. NakamuraM. KobayashiS. MiyatiT. Prediction of sufficient liver enhancement on the gadoxetate disodium-enhanced hepatobiliary phase imaging using transitional phase images and Albumin–bilirubin grade.Magn. Reson. Med. Sci.202120215215910.2463/mrms.mp.2020‑005032461506
     [Google Scholar]
  18. TakatsuY. NakamuraM. ShiozakiT. NarukamiS. YoshimaruD. MiyatiT. KobayashiS. Assessment of the cut-off value of quantitative liver–portal vein contrast ratio in the hepatobiliary phase of liver MRI.Clin. Radiol.2021767551.e17551.e2410.1016/j.crad.2021.03.01533902888
     [Google Scholar]
  19. NeriE. BaliM.A. Ba-SsalamahA. BoraschiP. BrancatelliG. AlvesF.C. GrazioliL. HelmbergerT. LeeJ.M. ManfrediR. Martì-BonmatìL. MatosC. MerkleE.M. Op De BeeckB. SchimaW. SkehanS. VilgrainV. ZechC. BartolozziC. ESGAR consensus statement on liver MR imaging and clinical use of liver-specific contrast agents.Eur. Radiol.201626492193110.1007/s00330‑015‑3900‑326194455
     [Google Scholar]
  20. YeX. LiuX. SongD. ZhangX. ZhuB. WeiL. PeiX. WuJ. LouT. ZhaoW. Estimating glomerular filtration rate by serum creatinine or/and cystatin C equations: An analysis of multi‐centre Chinese subjects.Nephrology (Carlton)201621537237810.1111/nep.1263626427030
     [Google Scholar]
  21. KatoN. YokawaT. TamuraA. HeshikiA. EbertW. WeinmannH.J. Gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid interaction with clinical drugs in rats.Invest. Radiol.2002371268068410.1097/00004424‑200212000‑0000712447001
     [Google Scholar]
  22. VavrickaS.R. Van MontfoortJ. HaH.R. MeierP.J. FattingerK. Interactions of rifamycin SV and rifampicin with organic anion uptake systems of human liver.Hepatology200236116417210.1053/jhep.2002.3413312085361
     [Google Scholar]
  23. CruiteI. SchroederM. MerkleE.M. SirlinC.B. Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI of the liver: Part 2, protocol optimization and lesion appearance in the cirrhotic liver.AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.20101951294110.2214/AJR.10.453820566795
     [Google Scholar]
  24. RingeK.I. HusarikD.B. SirlinC.B. MerkleE.M. Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI of the liver: Part 1, protocol optimization and lesion appearance in the noncirrhotic liver.AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.20101951132810.2214/AJR.10.439220566794
     [Google Scholar]
  25. EASL clinical practice guidelines on the management of benign liver tumours.J. Hepatol.201665238639810.1016/j.jhep.2016.04.00127085809
     [Google Scholar]
  26. ZechC.J. Ba-SsalamahA. BergT. ChandaranaH. ChauG.Y. GrazioliL. KimM.J. LeeJ.M. MerkleE.M. MurakamiT. RickeJ. B SirlinC. SongB. TaouliB. YoshimitsuK. KohD.M. Consensus report from the 8th International Forum for liver magnetic resonance imaging.Eur. Radiol.202030137038210.1007/s00330‑019‑06369‑431385048
     [Google Scholar]
  27. KohD.M. Ba-SsalamahA. BrancatelliG. FananapazirG. FielM.I. GoshimaS. JuS.H. KartalisN. KudoM. LeeJ.M. MurakamiT. SeidenstickerM. SirlinC.B. TanC.H. WangJ. YoonJ.H. ZengM. ZhouJ. TaouliB. Consensus report from the 9th International Forum for Liver Magnetic Resonance Imaging: applications of gadoxetic acid-enhanced imaging.Eur. Radiol.20213185615562810.1007/s00330‑020‑07637‑433523304
     [Google Scholar]
  28. TakatsuY. NakamuraM. KobayashiS. MiyatiT. Visual criterion for evaluating hepatobiliary phase image acquisition of gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid-enhanced MRI.Clin. Radiol.2018738760.e1760.e610.1016/j.crad.2018.04.00129724434
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056318603240910115315
Loading
Whether the Liver-to-Portal Vein Ratio is Applicable for Evaluating the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology Hepatobiliary Phase in Gd-EOB-DTPA-Enhanced MRI?
Curr. Med. Imaging 20, e15734056318603 (2024); https://doi.org/10.2174/0115734056318603240910115315
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056318603240910115315
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/0115734056318603240910115315
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:     Research Article
Keyword(s): Gadoxetic acid disodium; Hepatobiliary phase; Liver-to-portal vein ratio; Liver-to-spleen ratio; Magnetic resonance imaging; Organic anion transport polypeptides

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test